Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 09:48:58 -0500 (EST) From: Peter Dufault <dufault@hda.com> To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Cc: dufault@hda.com, jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Jukka Ukkonen: POSIX.4 - scheduler once more (as you requested) Message-ID: <199702031448.JAA19438@hda.hda.com> In-Reply-To: <199702030234.NAA01680@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from Michael Smith at "Feb 3, 97 01:04:14 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Peter Dufault stands accused of saying: > > One quick observation: > > > > > X * 5. The source code must be available for anyone who wishes to have it. > > > > What do people think of packaging this up as a user library against > > an LKM'd pseudo /dev/realtime driver? I have the skeleton to do > > How does this help the posix.4 scheduling model though? Does having it as > an LKM still allow this to work "as expected"? I have an LKM skeleton that includes scheduling. I have to decide if I like it or not. Everything funnels through an ioctl, though it is set up to be installed as system calls if that is preferred. I've been thinking about a dispatch through system calls that is redirected from the default if you have the device open since I think that works as the best of both worlds. > > that. My reasoning is I'd like to be able to have different realtime > > facilities, for example, process migration to an attached embedded > > processor that would "fault" back as soon as you tried to do > > something in that environment. It also gives you a way to have > > realtime user or group protection. > > Sounds reasonable (and interesting). Do you have more words on this > somewhere? I have too many words on it. Maybe at the end of the week I'll proofread it and put it someplace public. -- Peter Dufault (dufault@hda.com) Realtime Machine Control and Simulation HD Associates, Inc. Voice: 508 433 6936
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702031448.JAA19438>